Different shades of green: how transnational actors frame nature as a solution to sustainability challenges in African cities

Nature – based solutions (NBS) are increasingly being positioned within global discourses concerning how urban sustainability challenges can be addressed. To better understand to what extent, how, by whom and with what potential implications NBS are promoted in urban Africa, this paper focuses on transnational actors and presents a dataset covering 40 NBS initiatives in 57 cities across 19 African countries. A framing analysis is undertaken to understand to what degree NBS are mobilised in accordance with global discourses. To that end, the paper builds on existing work by Tozer et al. (2022, “Transnational Governance and the Urban Politics of Nature-Based Solutions for Climate Change.” Global Environmental Politics, 1–23) on globally circulating frames of urban nature. In further contributing to their framework, we delve into the underlying values or shades of green that are being signified through the frames by applying the IPBES Nature Futures Framework. Results indicate that urban nature comes to be seen as a solution within a climate resilience – integrated benefits nexus through which various types of transnational actors are bringing nature into the city. Two important findings can be highlighted: First, the deployed frames offer opportunities to address major African urban sustainability challenges, but initiatives may not yet be configured to adequately address their scope and magnitude. Second, the configurations of frames are predominantly informed by instrumental values that put "Nature for Society” perspectives in focus, missing opportunities for NBS to build on relational values, or “Nature as Culture” perspectives and for accommodating a plurality of worldviews on desirable futures for urban nature

Nature for resilience reconfigured: global-to-local translation of frames in Africa

Globally, various frames of urban nature circulate, each emphasising particular challenges and natural solutions in the climate context. Yet which actors and dynamics shape their translation to the African context remains unclear. This paper explores the global-to-local translation process of frames through interventions funded by transnational actors, conceptualised as agents of policy transfer. Critical scholarship has observed that urban adaptation and resilience interventions in Africa are often characterised as technocratic and top-down approaches, hence it is vital to understand whether these are replicated through proliferating nature-based solutions (NBSs). The study of a resilience-building intervention in Lilongwe, Malawi, reveals that transnational actors play important roles by deploying frames of urban nature through funding projects. However, rather than involving a top-down imposition of particular solutions, this sets in motion dynamics: in the competition for resources that frames generate, various actor constellations of transnational actors, subnational governments and local NGOs reconfigure or relabel strategies and associated (nature-based) practices to suit global frames and the resources they generate. This shapes who is included or not, and what kinds of NBS are being developed, for and by whom. There is a risk that priorities of communities get lost in translation

Cities and the Transformation of Biodiversity Governance

The governing of nature has been an essential part of the story of urbanization. Whether through the conversion of rivers for transportation, the creation of urban drainage systems for wastewater removal or the installation of parks for their recreational and aesthetic value (Gandy, 2004; Gleeson and Low, 2000; Rydin, 1998), nature has played a critical role in urban development. Yet, conservationist thinking, which has dominated environmental governance and policy, has tended to equate the environment as belonging to either “rural” or “wilderness” places that needed to be protected from the encroachment of (urban) society (Owens, 1992). As a result, much of the governance of biodiversity at the urban scale during the twentieth century was focused on the designation and enforcement of protected areas (Vaccaro et al., 2013)

Nature for resilience reconfigured: global-to-local translation of frames in Africa

Globally, various frames of urban nature circulate, each emphasising particular challenges and natural solutions in the climate context. Yet which actors and dynamics shape their translation to the African context remains unclear. This paper explores the global-to-local translation process of frames through interventions funded by transnational actors, conceptualised as agents of policy transfer. Critical scholarship has observed that urban adaptation and resilience interventions in Africa are often characterised as technocratic and top-down approaches, hence it is vital to understand whether these are replicated through proliferating nature-based solutions (NBSs). The study of a resilience-building intervention in Lilongwe, Malawi, reveals that transnational actors play important roles by deploying frames of urban nature through funding projects. However, rather than involving a top-down imposition of particular solutions, this sets in motion dynamics: in the competition for resources that frames generate, various actor constellations of transnational actors, subnational governments and local NGOs reconfigure or relabel strategies and associated (nature-based) practices to suit global frames and the resources they generate. This shapes who is included or not, and what kinds of NBS are being developed, for and by whom. There is a risk that priorities of communities get lost in translation. Policy relevance Frames of urban nature shape global agendas but also matter locally in the design of programmes and projects. This study provides key insights of relevance for policymakers. First, external funding for climate and resilience is unpredictable and insufficient to address manifold urgent local priorities. It is important that actors at all levels strive to align resources to holistic strategies of local governments and do not impose certain visions for urban nature. For this to happen, and second, it is key that local governments and communities are empowered to create forms of nature that are built around diverse forms of local knowledge and expertise, to cater to values and priorities of the communities. Third, proponents of NBSs highlight their potential to address interlinked climate-, biodiversity- and society-related challenges. However, unless funding allocation puts emphasis on the interlinkage of goals, the potential for NBSs to reach multiple goals can get lost. Fourth, there is a need to disrupt the persisting scepticism concerning the feasibility of NBSs in informal settlements and forge collaborations that realise interventions closely linked to the priorities of disadvantaged groups in African cities, to leverage the power of nature for more just societies

Cities and the Transformation of Biodiversity Governance

The governing of nature has been an essential part of the story of urbanization. Whether through the conversion of rivers for transportation, the creation of urban drainage systems for wastewater removal or the installation of parks for their recreational and aesthetic value (Gandy, 2004; Gleeson and Low, 2000; Rydin, 1998), nature has played a critical role in urban development. Yet, conservationist thinking, which has dominated environmental governance and policy, has tended to equate the environment as belonging to either “rural” or “wilderness” places that needed to be protected from the encroachment of (urban) society (Owens, 1992). As a result, much of the governance of biodiversity at the urban scale during the twentieth century was focused on the designation and enforcement of protected areas (Vaccaro et al., 2013)